I feel the distinction between rishonim and a&#7717;aronim is unnecessary since theology/teachings form a continuation with the latter day teachings serving to fulfil the ones of earlier times. Well, anyway.

Monism in its ultimate reach falls short of the absolute standard since it insists on explaining existence with reference to one source and so it goes about reducing the various grades of consciousness and energy into higher or subtler ones with the rationale being that the subtle is the source of the gross.

Finally, the analysis arrives at a point where you get two systems - pure consciousness and pure energy which are the subtlest states of these entities.

How to fuse these two into one?

The monists then aver that pure consciousness is the source of pure energy. This contention is wrong since pure awareness can never give rise to pure energy which is the dynamic side of the universe.

Is it possible to unite pure consciousness and pure energy into a singularity? What would that be? Is it logical to do so?

In the Talmudic-based writings it's rare to find an attempt to discard the authority of former teachers with the ground rule being that Amoraim is not permitted to contradict the words of the Tannaim. I agree with this viewpoint since if we assume that the older revelations were correct then later day revelations can only add more insights on the subject matter while never discarding the older teachings and laws. It is a case of the new fulfilling the old to form one cohesive system. I am talking strictly in a Jewish context and leave out other worldviews that may or may not support such a contention.

The serious problem with believers is that the religious mind is prone to accept the testimony of the past and remoteness in time adds weight to a scripture or authority.

Were the ancients superior to the moderns?

If the ancients could come into direct contact with supraphysical phenomena and supraphysical beings and manifest them in life then why can't the modern mind do the same?

Is there any fundamental difference between the constitution of the ancient mind as compared to the modern mind?

Were the ancients more capable than the moderns?

If so, in what way?

Or, is it that the God they worshipped has retreated and no longer wishes to come into direct contact with moderns?

If cosmic principles are universal and eternal states of existence, then, it should be possible for a modern to repeat the same inner experiences of the ancients and go beyond if the capacity to do so exists.

It's evident that the last word has still to be revealed given the imperfections and limitations of the previous revealed words.

The mistake believers make is to consider the being they worship as God the ultimate reality when obviously an anthropopathic being who sways with all the dualisms found in the lower planes can not be the ineffable ultimate reality that's beyond name and beyond namelessness, beyond form and beyond formlessness, beyond mutability and beyond immutability, beyond existence and beyond non-existence, beyond attribution and beyond non-attribution and beyond being and non-being.

The ultimate reality is a unified system that serves as the source of these and exceeds the manifested effects.

Causation or cause and effect cannot explain the ultimate reality (absolute) since the causal mechanism is itself a device fashioned by the absolute to serve as the organizing and evolutionary principle in the manifestation (universe).

Our prophet was not only a preacher. He was also an able administrator and a just ruler.

Those who have experience of administration know when to act tough and when to act with leniency. A King, Ruler and President knows which criminal to pardon and which to get executed. Those who do not have this experience may only speak in idealistic terms. Such idealistic persons are never able to administer any country or state with efficiency.

Beside so many “Swords” which we have mentioned earlier on this thread. He also had a sword of steel. When no other sword worked and the only solution was to wield the sword of steel, he used that also.

Any one who has read his biography knows that how reluctantly he had to use it. We present below, some of these cases, where prophet had to use the sword of steel.

C. The Case of : UQBAH BIN ABU MU’EET

UQBAH BIN ABU MU’EET was an influential chief of Makkah. He was one of the strongest opponent of Prophet when he was preaching his mission in Makkah. He used to taunt and make fun of prophet whenever he used to address people or was giving any sermon.

On one occasion when Prophet was praying in Kaaba and was in the act of prostration, this stone hearted man, asked some one to get intestines and other rejected parts of a slain camel to put on the back of prophet. Due to this weight, prophet was unable to sit-up from prostration. UQBAH BIN ABU MU’EET and his group were laughing and enjoying the scene.

Some one informed Fatima the daughter of prophet who came running and removed the filth from his back. When prophet finished his prayer and lifted his hands towards sky and said “O Allah! You take care of UQBAH BIN ABU MU’EET , Abu JAHL….and a few others” This filled all these persons with fear.

UQBAH BIN ABU MU’EET was with the army of Makkan when they went for the battle of Badr, he was captured during the battle. He was being taken to Madina, when one night prophet saw him joking and laughing and as if his captivity had not made any change in his attitude towards life.

So prophet ordered that he be executed and he along with another captive (whose case is next) was executed.

The prophet had to use “steel sword on some one” when he was convinced that he should be made an example for others. We abide by his judgment.

D. The Case of : NADHER BIN HARITH

He was also one of the prominent person of Makkah and a very staunch enemy of Islam and prophet. When the stories of prophets were revealed in Quran, he used to say that these are nothing but tales of past and imaginary stories.

Then he went to Syria and Iran and brought from there books of their folklore and old stories. These he used to recite during nigh gathering of Makkah people, so as to wean them away from listening to Quran. Some commentrators say that he was the person mentioned in 31:6-7, which read:

“But there are, among men, those who purchase idle tales, without knowledge (for meaning) to mislead (men) from the path of Allah and ridicule (on the Path): for such there will be a humiliating penality. When our signs are rehearsed to such a one, he turns away in arrogance, as if he heard them not, as if there was deafness inboth his ears: announce to him a grieveious Penality”

NADHER BIN HARITH also took part in the battle of Badr, and was taken captive during the war. He was also one whom prophet ordered to be killed along with UQBAH BIN MU”EET.

After his death, his daughter wrote an obituary for him in poem where she said “O prophet of Allah, NADHER also deserved from your mercy as you did for your other kins….” When prophet heard it, he said, if I had heard it before, I would have spared his life.

KOSHER:Kosher slaughter has attracted criticism from some groups concerned with animal welfare, who contend that the absence of any form of anesthesia or stunning prior to the severance of the animal's jugular vein causes unnecessary pain and suffering. Calls for the abolition of kosher slaughter have been made by veterinarians and animal rights activists.

You left out the rest of the article, and edited out the fact that the veterinarians were German

"....More recently, kosher slaughter has attracted criticism from some groups concerned with animal welfare, who contend that the absence of any form of anesthesia or stunning prior to the severance of the animal's jugular vein causes unnecessary pain and suffering. Calls for the abolition of kosher slaughter have been made in 2008 by Germany's federal chamber of veterinarians,[23] and in 2011 by the Party for Animals in the Dutch parliament.[24] In both incidents, Jewish groups responded that the criticisms were attacks against their religion.[23][24]

Supporters of kosher slaughter counter that Judaism requires the practice precisely because it is considered humane.[22]

Research conducted by Temple Grandin and Joe M. Regenstein shows that, practiced correctly with proper restraint systems, kosher slaughter results in little pain and suffering, and notes that behavioral reactions to the incision made during kosher slaughter are less than those to noises such as clanging or hissing, inversion or pressure during restraint.[25].."

THE PROBLEM WITH BELIEVERS & RELIGIONS:If the ancients could come into direct contact with supraphysical phenomena and supraphysical beings and manifest them in life then why can't the modern mind do the same?

I can only speak for my religion, but in my religion it is ASSUMED that the modern mind can, hence the practice of the religion.

2. Don’t eat anything with more than five ingredients, or ingredients you can't pronounce.

3. Stay out of the middle of the supermarket; shop on the perimeter of the store. Real food tends to be on the outer edge of the store near the loading docks, where it can be replaced with fresh foods when it goes bad.

4.Don't eat anything that won't eventually rot. "There are exceptions -- honey -- but as a rule, things like Twinkies that never go bad aren't food," Pollan says.

5. It is not just what you eat but how you eat. "Always leave the table a little hungry," Pollan says. "Many cultures have rules that you stop eating before you are full. In Japan, they say eat until you are four-fifths full. Islamic culture has a similar rule, and in German culture they say,'Tie off the sack before it's full.'"

6. Families traditionally ate together, around a table and not a TV, at regular meal times. It's a good tradition. Enjoy meals with the people you love. "Remember when eating between meals felt wrong?" Pollan asks.

7. Don't buy food where you buy your gasoline. In the U.S., 20% of food is eaten in the car.

THE LIMITATION OF CAUSATION:Causation or cause and effect cannot explain the ultimate reality (absolute) since the causal mechanism is itself a device fashioned by the absolute to serve as the organizing and evolutionary principle in the manifestation (universe).

How do you define 'the absolute'?Ultimate reality would just be another overeaching definition.How would it fashion (figure of speech) a causal mechanism?

More concrete. You cannot observe what caused space-time, for you cannot look beyond/before space-time.

1) Monism cannot solve the ultimate mystery of the absolute state since it posits that energy is a product of consciousness. This is impossible since consciousness or awareness of various gradations ranging from the grossest to the subtlest lacks dynamism and so it cannot be energetic by itself nor the source of energy.

2) Causation cannot be the ultimate reality or the absolute since effect is the cause in partial or complete manifestation and anything within causation is as such limited by the specific causal mechanism and the phenomena it is responsible for.

3) Each plane of existence has its own causal mechanism that is an aspect of the universal causal mechanism.

4) The causal mechanism in its origin or at its starting point will be a dynamic device that has the potential of giving rise to the cosmos in all its dimensions. How did the causal mechanism arise? What is its nature? Is it circumscribed by its own limits?

5) If the causal mechanism is the dynamic side of the cosmos then it has to necessarily manifest its dynamism and as such it cannot simply be at absolute rest in a supreme poise of pure awareness devoid of any trace of dynamism or activity.

6) Dynamism is not intelligent or purposeful and so it has to derive its organizational capacity from pure awareness that is the all-knowing pure intelligent principle.

7) Dynamism or activity is the signature characteristic of energy that is in turn guided by an inherent consciousness or intelligent principle.

8) On the other had, pure consciousness lacks dynamism and so is devoid of energy.

9) We arrive at two systems - pure consciousness and pure energy. One without the other is incomplete.

10) We conclude that pure consciousness and pure energy are compatible with each other for the purpose of bringing forth the cosmos and are as a result naturally unified in their basal mechanisms for them to be fully effective.

11) Pure consciousness and pure energy form a self-existent unified field of consciousness-energy.

12) A partial manifestation of this unified state of consciousness-energy (that is the source of the material as well as efficient aspects of the universe) gives rise to the cosmos.

13) A complete withdrawal of the cosmos would mean that the manifested aspects of consciousness-energy would revert to the stato-dynamic unified field of consciousness-energy.

14) With the withdrawal of the cosmos into the unified field of consciousness-energy the energy component enters into a state of dormancy and pure consciousness is all that remains.

I think the issue is that we are trying to uniquely define something that is vague by nature. Plus, trying to define pizza is like trying to define bread - elementally its all the same stuff in different combos.

Research conducted by Temple Grandin and Joe M. Regenstein shows that, practiced correctly with proper restraint systems, kosher slaughter results in little pain and suffering, and notes that behavioral reactions to the incision made during kosher slaughter are less than those to noises such as clanging or hissing, inversion or pressure during restraint.[25].."

Pain is a subjective phenomenon.

To measure or experience the actual degree of pain felt by an animal being slaughtered, one has to enter into the consciousness of the beast. There is no other way of knowing. Obviously, a deep cut to the jugular would pain a hell of a lot causing great suffering to the animal as it dies writhing and heaving in a mass of blood.

<quoted text>Are you threatening me?Is quoting from Margoliuth book is a sort of "Anti Virus" for people like me?It means you also consider him as a person with "strong Anti Muslim Bias"?That just proves my case that he was not a True Scholar whose aim is to present the truth.He was the most biased person that wrote on Islam and I do not find any excuse for such people....because they did it knowingly and after understanding the full message.May be we can put him in the same league of ABDULLAH BIN UBAI, KAAB BIN ASHRAF OR ABU LAHAB (I think that he was most on the line of ABU LAHAB, whose story shall follow after a few episodes) Inshallah, i.e. Allah Willing

My point is that you started this seris as an apology to present the prophet as a humane character, in recounting the grossest human rights violations in a favourable light, were the prophet always comes out with clean hands.

The book by Margoliouth (which is a synopsis of several studies of some people that are held to the highest esteem by Islamic authorities) shows the real authentic Islam and it's traditions, before the west made an entry and before they thus felt a need to start a public relations campaign.An example is being so favourably inclined towards the sciences.Well if banning astronomy is an exampe of the reality, we know that reinstating it is the apologist public scrutiny from the west awareness. They are aware now that the west does not abide duplicity, but have not caught on that the same goes for equivocation.

So i'm saying that you are painting a biassed picture.And that i feel inclined to right this wrong.Since you are not doing a favor to the truth.Your anti-western bias shimmers trough in your iterated response.But the point is that muslims would also be fooled.Modernism as in a proper analysis and multifacetted reality is not provided and is most certainly not served by a cover of apologist white-washing.No matter how thin that veneer is. Precisely that makes the intent of arrogance in assuming ignorance on the part of the western receiver, so clear.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Add your comments below

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite.
Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.